Mid-Term Efficacy of Subxiphoid Versus Transpleural Pericardial Window for Pericardial Effusion.
J Surg Res
; 252: 9-15, 2020 08.
Article
en En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-32213328
BACKGROUND: The optimal surgical technique for drainage of pericardial effusions is frequently debated. Transpleural drainage via thoracotomy or thoracoscopy is hypothesized to provide more durable freedom from recurrent pericardial effusion than a subxiphoid pericardial window. We sought to compare operative outcomes and mid-term freedom from recurrent effusion between both approaches in patients with nontraumatic pericardial effusions. METHODS: All patients at our institution who underwent a pericardial window from 2001 to 2018 were identified. After excluding those who underwent recent cardiothoracic surgery or trauma, patients (n = 46) were stratified by surgical approach and presence of malignancy. Primary outcome was freedom from recurrent moderate or greater pericardial effusion. Secondary outcomes included operative mortality and morbidity and mid-term survival. Follow-up was determined by medical record review, with a follow-up of 67 patient-years. Fisher's exact test and Wilcoxon rank-sum test were used to compare groups. Mid-term survival and freedom from effusion recurrence were determined using Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Subxiphoid windows (n = 31; 67%) were more frequently performed than transpleural windows (n = 15; 33%) and baseline characteristics were similar. Effusion etiologies included malignancy (n = 22; 48%), idiopathic (n = 12; 26%), uremia (n = 8; 17%), and collagen vascular disease (n = 4; 9%). Perioperative outcomes were comparable between the two surgical approaches, except for longer drain duration (7 versus 4 d, P = 0.029) in the subxiphoid group. Operative mortality was 19.6% overall and 36.4% in patients with malignancy. Mid-term survival and freedom from moderate or greater pericardial effusion recurrence was 37% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19%-54%) and 69% (95% CI: 52%-86%) at 5 y, respectively. There was no difference in mid-term survival (P = 0.90) or freedom from pericardial effusion recurrence (P = 0.70) between surgical approaches. Although malignant etiology had worse late survival (P < 0.01), freedom from effusion recurrence was similar to nonmalignant etiology (P = 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: Pericardial window provides effective mid-term relief of pericardial effusion. Subxiphoid and transpleural windows are equivalent in mid-term efficacy and both surgical approaches can be considered. Patients with malignancy have acceptable operative mortality with low incidence of recurrent effusion, supporting palliative indications.
Palabras clave
Texto completo:
1
Colección:
01-internacional
Base de datos:
MEDLINE
Asunto principal:
Cuidados Paliativos
/
Derrame Pericárdico
/
Técnicas de Ventana Pericárdica
/
Prevención Secundaria
/
Neoplasias
Tipo de estudio:
Etiology_studies
/
Observational_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
Límite:
Adult
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Male
/
Middle aged
Idioma:
En
Revista:
J Surg Res
Año:
2020
Tipo del documento:
Article
Pais de publicación:
Estados Unidos